Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,886
The English Channel
- Thread starter Fatboy123
- Start date
Soldato
Part of the solution must be to reduce what benefits asylum seekers are able to access since we must be giving too much, we need to peg our offering to whatever the EU are offering.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,525
Ah, fair enough.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,886
Wow.
You don't even bother doing research do you.
Refugees seeking asylum get just over £5 per day and aren't allowed to work
You actually think they are from Afghanistan, how funny
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,886
Some are...I didn't claim all of them were.
It was an example. Sorry you took it quite literally to mean I am somehow claiming all refugees are claiming to be from Afghanistan.
Put on them on cruise liners and park them in the Atlantic to be processed
Soldato
It's not about my research.
When these migrants are interviewed, their perception is that there is more on offer here than in the EU. Hence them taking the risks to get here. Maybe in a migrant camp in Calais they're getting less and no one is educating them about what they could get if they claimed asylum where they are.
How many people do you think the UK could let in?
Assuming there was a legal, advertised and completely safe route into the UK. State sanctioned.
What do you think the demand would be to enter, and do you think we could meet that demand, without the UK itself turning into a slum?
Why do they want to come through Europe to get to the UK? Listening to the interviews in the Beeb today, migrants were saying it's just so much better in the UK, and after they get in, they could invite all their family in, and all their relatives. That's the impression they have, rightly or wrongly.
Should we just invite everybody from Afghanistan, Iraq, etc, to just come and settle here? Not sure you'd like the outcome of that, tbh.
The UK is a comparatively tiny land-mass, and people think it's the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow (quite why, is anyone's guess...)
Soldato
We've also made the offer to take in many from Hong Kong.
Caporegime
I wouldn’t bother asking this question. Whenever you ask them about how many we should let in, they swerve the question. I asked Murphy the question about 3 times on the other thread and he completely ignored it.
Soldato
France has got a bloody cheek suggesting it's the UK's problem to police France's southern shore border. They are reporting on the beeb that the people smugglers are now carrying guns, so France has basically accepted that a province of it's nation is basically lawless where people can roam with guns. Madness! You'd have thought they would have learnt from previous terrorist incidents, what looking the other way gets you.
Hong Kong is a former British territory full of highly educated people who have a similar world view, the more the merrier from HK.
Soldato
I'm not saying we shouldn't take those from HK, just that the numbers should be taken into consideration when people are suggesting we should take more migrants.
They give out more.
Soldato
The work opportunities appear to be different though according to the BBC reporting.
Surely they should round these people up at the Calais camps as they're in France illegally, rather than waiting for them to dash for the coast under cover of darkness.
Not getting much in France obviously.
Soldato
They should be processed now in an East African country. If it takes roughly 8 years to process their claim based on existing reported timescales then that ought to deter a good many. If they choose to abscond from that East African nation, they're likely to return to the EU and unlikely to want to risk being returned back to square 1.
I notice that all your responses talk about asylum seekers. Well, there's little doubt that many on these channel runs are economic migrants, is there.
When the Beeb interviews them and they all have Apple phones, many of them outright say they want to come for "a better life", which is entirely different to "escaping persecution" or "fleeing for my life". Quite often they interview Iraqis, and I'm not sure Iraq is currently that bad that you'd be fleeing in fear of your life.
They may simply believe that the UK is the place to go for better prospects. Whilst not a bad motivation, per se, it's not enough to warrant literally unlimited migration as you are suggesting. We don't hate foreigners, but you can't just relocate all the world's poor to the UK.
We would be opening ourselves not just to asylum seekers, but to people who are simply fed up of living in a less well developed country.
Whilst I have incredible sympathy for people living in **** holes, where corruption is rampant, and opportunities limited, the answer cannot be to funnel them all here, if their lives aren't actually in danger.
Now you might say, "Who would attempt that crossing if they weren't in danger?"
Well, they aren't in danger in France, for a start. But secondly, there are a lot of young men in those groups, and there will be the usual arrogance and bravado of young men. And after all, whilst not exactly safe, most of the boats do either make it across successfully or get intercepted and brought the rest of the way in safety.
Ultimately, I don't see how the UK can take unlimited migrants, of the economic kind. And I don't see how you'd stop the economic migrants. Once in the country it's too easy to just disappear.
So then what? We'd have vast groups of people sleeping rough or herded in camps living in squalor in the UK, rather than living in camps in France.
I think with what you're proposing we'd be overwhelmed quite quickly, tbh. Where would we put all the tens of thousands of people who would make a bee-line for the UK?
Permabanned
The French police and army have guns, they should use them!! But if I had undesirables in my garden and they were hell bent on going to the next town, I would be unlikely to try and stop them, whether their mentors were armed or not.
Last edited: